Landscape Ecology

, Volume 29, Issue 5, pp 803–815 | Cite as

Integrating single-species management and landscape conservation using regional habitat occurrence models: the northern goshawk in the Southwest, USA

  • Brett G. Dickson
  • Thomas D. Sisk
  • Steven E. Sesnie
  • Richard T. Reynolds
  • Steven S. Rosenstock
  • Christina D. Vojta
  • Michael F. Ingraldi
  • Jill M. Rundall
Research Article

Abstract

Conservation planners and land managers are often confronted with scale-associated challenges when assessing the relationship between land management objectives and species conservation. Conservation of individual species typically involves site-level analyses of habitat, whereas land management focuses on larger spatial extents. New models are needed to more explicitly integrate species-specific conservation with landscape or regional scales. We address this challenge with an example using the northern goshawk (Accipiter gentilis), a forest raptor with circumpolar distribution that is the focus of intense debate regarding forest management on public lands in the southwestern USA. To address goshawk-specific habitat conservation across a management area of 22,800-km2 in northern Arizona, we focused on the territory scale rather than individual nest sites. We compiled a 17-year database of 895 nest sites to estimate territory locations. We then estimated the likelihood of territory occurrence for the entire management area using multiple logistic regression within an expert-driven, spatially balanced, and information-theoretic framework. Our occurrence model incorporated forest structure variables that were derived from USFS Forest Inventory and Analysis plots and high-resolution satellite imagery. Results indicated that high canopy-bulk density, intermediate canopy-base heights, and low variation in tree density were strong predictors of territory occurrence. We used model-averaged parameter estimates for these variables to map and explore patterns of territory distribution across multiple land jurisdictions and ecological subregions. Our iterative modeling approach complements previous demographic studies in the region. It also provides a robust framework for integrating species conservation and landscape management in ongoing and future regional planning efforts.

Keywords

Accipiter gentilis Forest management Multi-model inference Pinus ponderosa Restoration Spatial model 

Supplementary material

10980_2014_13_MOESM1_ESM.docx (23 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 24 kb)

References

  1. Allen CD, Savage M, Falk DA, Suckling KF, Swetnam TW, Schulke T, Stacey PB, Morgan P, Hoffman M, Klingel JT (2002) Ecological restoration of southwestern ponderosa pine systems: a broad perspective. Ecol Appl 12:1418–1433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersen DE, DeStefano S, Goldstein MI, Titus K, Crocker-Bedford C, Keane JJ, Anthony RG, Rosenfield RN (2005) Technical review of the status of northern goshawks in the western United States. J Raptor Res 39:192–209Google Scholar
  3. Anderson DR (2008) Model based inference in the life sciences: a primer on evidence. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Angermeier PL (2000) The natural imperative for biological conservation. Conserv Biol 14:373–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barbieri MM, Berger JO (2004) Optimal predictive model selection. Ann Stat 32:870–897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beck JL, Skorkowsky RC, Hayward GD (2011) Estimating occupancy to monitor northern goshawk in the central Rocky Mountains. J Wildl Manag 75:513–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beier P, Drennan JE (1997) Forest structure and prey abundance in foraging areas of northern goshawks. Ecol Appl 7:564–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beier P, Rogan EC, Ingraldi MF, Rosenstock SS (2008) Does forest structure affect reproduction of northern goshawks in ponderosa pine forests? J Appl Ecol 45:342–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Binkley D, Olsson U, Rochelle R, Stohlgren T, Nikolov N (2003) Structure, production and resource use in some old-growth spruce-fir forests in the Front Range of the Rocky Mountains, USA. For Ecol Manage 172:271–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boal CW, Andersen DE, Kennedy PL (2005) Foraging and nesting habitat of breeding male northern goshawks in the Laurentian Mixed Forest Province, Minnesota. J Wildl Manag 69:1516–1527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boyce DA Jr, Reynolds RT, Graham RT (2006) Goshawk status and management: what do we know, what have we done, where are we going? Stud Avian Biol 31:312–325Google Scholar
  12. Breiman L (2001) Random forests. Mach Learn 45:5–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer-Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Carroll C, Noss RF, Paquet PC (2001) Carnivores as focal species for conservation planning in the Rocky Mountain region. Ecol Appl 11:961–980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carroll C, Rodriguez RL, McCarthy C, Paulin KM (2006) Resource selection function models as tools for regional conservation planning for northern goshawk in Utah. Stud Avian Biol 31:288–298Google Scholar
  16. Crannell D, DeStefano S (1992) An aggressive interaction between a northern goshawk and a red tailed hawk. J Raptor Res 26:269–270Google Scholar
  17. Crocker-Bedford DC (1995) Northern goshawk reproduction and forest management. Journal of Raptor Research 29:42–43Google Scholar
  18. Dixon GE (Comp.) 2002 Essential FVS: A user’s guide to the forest vegetation simulator. Internal Rep. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Management Center, Fort CollinsGoogle Scholar
  19. Finn SR, Varland DE, Marzluff JM (2002) Does northern goshawk breeding occupancy vary with nest-stand characteristics on the Olympic Peninsula, Washington? J Raptor Res 36:265–279Google Scholar
  20. Greenwald DN, Crocker-Bedford DC, Broberg L, Suckling KF, Tibbitts T (2005) A review of northern goshawk habitat selection in the home range and implications for forest management in the western United States. Wildl Soc Bull 33:120–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Haining R (2003) Spatial data analysis: theory and practice. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hessburg PF, Agee JK, Franklin JF (2005) Dry forest and wildland fires of the inland Northwest USA: contrasting the landscape ecology of the pre-settlement and modern eras. For Ecol Manage 211:117–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S (2000) Applied logistic regression. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Klaver RW, Backlund D, Bartelt PE, Erickson MG, Knowles CJ, Knowles PR, Wimberly MC (2012) Spatial analysis of northern goshawk territories in the Black Hills, South Dakota. Condor 114:532–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. La Sorte FA, Mannan RW, Reynolds RT, Grubb TG (2004) Habitat associations of sympatric red-tailed hawks, and northern goshawks on the Kaibab Plateau. J Wildl Manag 68:307–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Legendre P, Legendre L (1998) Numerical ecology, 2nd edn. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  27. McGrath MT, DeStefano S, Riggs RA, Irwin LL, Roloff GJ (2003) Spatially explicit influences on northern goshawk nesting habitat in the interior Pacific Northwest. Wildl Monogr 154:1–63Google Scholar
  28. Neter J, Kutner MH, Nachtsheim CJ, Wasserman W (1996) Applied linear statistical models, 4th edn. WCB/McGraw-Hill, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  29. Noon BR, McKelvey KS, Dickson BG (2009) Multispecies conservation planning on US federal lands. In: Millspaugh JJ, Thompson FR III (eds) Models for planning wildlife conservation in large landscapes. Elsevier, London, pp 51–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pearce JL, Boyce MS (2006) Modelling distribution and abundance with presence-only data. J Appl Ecol 43:405–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Peck J (2000) Seeing the forest through the eyes of a hawk: an evaluation of recent efforts to protect northern goshawk populations in southwestern forests. Nat Resour J 40:125–156Google Scholar
  32. Penteriani V (2002) Goshawk nesting habitat in Europe and North America: a review. Ornis Fennica 79:149–163Google Scholar
  33. Penteriani V, Faivre B, Frochot B (2001) An approach to identify factors and levels of nesting habitat selection: a cross-scale analysis of goshawk preferences. Ornis Fennica 78:159–167Google Scholar
  34. Ray CT, Dickson BG, Sisk TD, Sesnie SE (2014) Spatial application of a predictive wildlife occurrence model to assess alternative forest management scenarios in northern Arizona. Forest Ecol Manag (in press)Google Scholar
  35. Reynolds RT, Joy SM (2006) Demography of northern goshawks in northern Arizona, 1991–1996. Stud Avian Biol 31:63–74Google Scholar
  36. Reynolds RT, Graham RT, Hildegard Reiser M (1992) Management recommendations for the northern goshawk in the southwestern United States. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, General Technical Report RM-217, Fort CollinsGoogle Scholar
  37. Reynolds RT, Wiens JD, Joy SM, Salafsky SR (2005) Sampling considerations for demographic and habitat studies of northern goshawks. J Raptor Res 39:274–285Google Scholar
  38. Reynolds RT, Wiens JD, Salafsky SR (2006) A review and evaluation of factors limiting northern goshawk populations. Stud Avian Biol 31:260–273Google Scholar
  39. Reynolds RT, Graham RT, Boyce DA Jr (2008) Northern goshawk habitat: and intersection of science, management, and conservation. J Wildl Manag 72:1047–1055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Salafsky SR, Reynolds RT, Noon BR (2005) Patterns of temporal variation in goshawk reproduction and prey resources. J Raptor Res 39:237–246Google Scholar
  41. Shtatland ES, Kleinman K, Cain EM (2004) A new strategy of model building in PROC LOGISTIC with automatic variable selection, validation, shrinkage and model averaging. In: SUGI’29: Proceedings of the twenty-ninth annual SAS® users group international conference. SAS Institute, Cary. Proceeding Paper 191–29Google Scholar
  42. Sisk TD, Savage M, Falk DA, Allen CD, Muldavin E, McCarthy P (2005) A landscape perspective for forest restoration. J Forest 103:319–320Google Scholar
  43. Sisk TD, Rundall JM, Nielsen E, Dickson BG, Sesnie SE (2009) The Kaibab Forest Health Focus: collaborative prioritization of landscapes and restoration treatments on the Kaibab National Forest. Final report. School of Earth Sciences and Environmental Sustainability, Northern Arizona University, FlagstaffGoogle Scholar
  44. Teich GMR, Vaughn J, Cortner HJ (2004) National trends in the use of forest service administrative appeals. J Forest 102:14–19Google Scholar
  45. White MA, Vankat JL (1993) Middle and high elevation coniferous forest communities of the North Rim region of Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona, USA. Vegetatio 109:169–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Williams RL (2000) A note on robust variance estimation for cluster-correlated data. Biometrics 56:645–646PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wooldridge JM (2009) Introductory econometrics: a modern approach, 4th edn. Southwestern College, Chula VistaGoogle Scholar
  48. Youtz JA, Graham RT, Reynolds RT, Simon J (2008) Implementing northern goshawk habitat management in southwestern forests: a template for restoring fire-adapted forest ecosystems. In: Deal RL (ed) Integrated restoration of forested ecosystems to achieve multiresource benefits: proceedings of the 2007 national silviculture workshop. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report PNW-GTR-733, Portland, pp 173–191Google Scholar
  49. Zarnetske PL, Edwards TC Jr, Moisen GG (2007) Habitat classification modeling with incomplete data: pushing the habitat envelope. Ecol Appl 17:1714–1726PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brett G. Dickson
    • 1
    • 2
  • Thomas D. Sisk
    • 1
  • Steven E. Sesnie
    • 1
  • Richard T. Reynolds
    • 3
  • Steven S. Rosenstock
    • 4
  • Christina D. Vojta
    • 1
  • Michael F. Ingraldi
    • 4
  • Jill M. Rundall
    • 1
  1. 1.Lab of Landscape Ecology and Conservation Biology, Landscape Conservation InitiativeNorthern Arizona UniversityFlagstaffUSA
  2. 2.Conservation Science Partners, Inc.TruckeeUSA
  3. 3.U.S.D.A. Forest ServiceRocky Mountain Research StationFort CollinsUSA
  4. 4.Arizona Game and Fish Department, Research BranchPhoenixUSA

Personalised recommendations